<div>STP is probably not a good fit for this.</div><div><br></div><div>On the carrier side it can be done with redundant PW and VPLS multi-homing etc etc. Telstra Wholesale just notified me about that exact setup for Ethernet access.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Then on the customer side you could just have a dynamic routing protocol or other mechanism waiting for the failover. Tested regularly of course ;) Or, if you are moving the layer 2 elsewhere the same as the carrier side would cover it.</div><div><br></div><div>Carriers don't want to give you a way to create loops and also they get to make you pay for another circuit. Win.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Fri, 26 May 2017 at 15:55, Michael J. Carmody <<a href="mailto:michael@opusv.com.au">michael@opusv.com.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-AU" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_9033971223210437575WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">More of a general sense, we get Layer 2 handoff as VLAN’s at POI’s from PIPE/AAPT/Vocus/Amcom/Intellipath/Megaport.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I just want two of them for redundancy.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Again assuming network as weakest point, is not our issue here, I just want to handle switch failure at my end. So I want 2 x POI’s
going to 2 different switches, with some dump as hell loop prevention as braindead as (R)STP in place.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Am I being too KISS here?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">-Michael<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Sam Silvester [mailto:<a href="mailto:sam.silvester@gmail.com" target="_blank">sam.silvester@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, 26 May 2017 3:48 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Michael J. Carmody <<a href="mailto:michael@opusv.com.au" target="_blank">michael@opusv.com.au</a>>; <a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a></span></p></div></div><div lang="EN-AU" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="m_9033971223210437575WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] High availability options for terminating point-to-point Ethernet (on Cisco CE)<u></u><u></u></span></p></div></div><div lang="EN-AU" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="m_9033971223210437575WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Idle curiousity - what's wrong with Layer 3 redundancy & why would you want L2 spanning sites instead?<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">How would you propose to handle loop prevention between the wholesaler and yourself?<br>
<br>
On Friday, 26 May 2017, Michael J. Carmody <<a href="mailto:michael@opusv.com.au" target="_blank">michael@opusv.com.au</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I always wanted to have duplicate POI’s and have the layer-2 VLAN appear on both of them, then just
different switches for each POI.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">This though is a product feature I have never been able to find.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Fear of loops from the wholesaler?</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">-Michael</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> AusNOG
[mailto:<a>ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Matt Selbst<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, 26 May 2017 10:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Paul Holmanskikh <<a>ausnog@pkholm.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a>
AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] High availability options for terminating point-to-point Ethernet (on Cisco CE)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I'm surprised that everyone's default answer is basically "Don't worry about the hardware, the network is the most likely thing to fail". I totally get that and agree. But in a
carrier environment you want to be able to honestly say to customers "we're full redundant". If a point-to-point ethernet service terminates on a single piece of hardware then you can't really make that statement. How are the bigger carriers handling this?
I'm especially interested in this as it relates to a Cisco environment. At what level and what cost can you have a true HA solution?<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Paul Holmanskikh <<a>ausnog@pkholm.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">HI,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">ASR seamless fail-over is not as seamless as it marketed. There are lots of caveats. For PE redundancy we just run two BGP sessions between CE and two different PE. But PE is hardly a weakest
link, services usually fails due to access link. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">---</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"">NEXON - I.T. FOR THE DYNAMIC BUSINESS<br>
Paul Holmanskikh<br>
Senior Network Engineer<br>
<br>
Disclaimer: The contents of this email represent my own views and not necessarily the views of my employer</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">On 25/05/2017 21:13, Ryan Tucker wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #1010ff 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 5.0pt;margin-left:0cm;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">I'd be interested in an answer to this as well.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">The ASR1006 apparently does multiple physical route processors with fast failover for seemingly this purpose, but
I'm not aware of anything smaller/cheaper/more vendor agnostic (and VRRP just doesn't scale to "many" interfaces as mentioned above).</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">On Thu, 25 May 2017 at 21:05 Sam Silvester <<a>sam.silvester@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Doesn't give you a specific answer so apologies if not useful to your situation but in past teams I've seen the following
kind of things done. <br>
<br>
- We matched the customer SLA to the 'lowest common denominator' of the access link, or the aggregation router (generally we had 24x7x4 hour hardware replacement, so we doubled that to give time to install and reconfigure e.g. 8 hours restoration ETA). Often
there was a switching layer between the assorted backhaul providers and the aggregation PE so the option also existed to re-provision customers but that was never really something we planned to do.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">- We ran multiple boxes, so we spread the impact of hardware outages (and upgrades). If a customer wanted higher
availability, we provisioned them two links on two different aggregation boxes and ran HSRP or BGP sessions with them.<br>
<br>
Single boxes failing wasn't something that kept me up at night to be honest, it's empirical but we had more failures with backhaul providers and customer premises losing power than we ever had routers shit themselves in either a hardware or software fashion.
We tended to not run lots of complicated features on the one box, again we tended to build out at least a pair of aggregation edge devices for each type of service (PPP, colocation, business services etc)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Sam</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Matt Selbst <<a>matt.j.selbst@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Yes indeed I'm talking about the aggregation router failing.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Perhaps clustering multiple chassis although I don't know any Cisco agg routers that can do that.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Sam Silvester <<a>sam.silvester@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Hi Matt,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Matt Selbst <<a>matt.j.selbst@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Hi,
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Hoping for some advice. What is everyone doing for terminating point-to-point Ethernet services like AAPT's e-Line
in a high availability environment? Cisco environment.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">With PPPoE, high availability was much easier as you could just have multiple LNS's and failover easily when the
client would re-auth. With terminating a VLAN handoff on a /30 or /31 it makes HA much harder. If the customer edge router dies, failover seems pretty hard. VRRP doesn't seem to be an option especially with hundreds of customer sub-interfaces.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">Do you mean HA on the customer side or on your side?<br>
<br>
e.g. I assume you mean you want to protect against when your aggregation router dies, as obviously the P2P Ethernet service is kind of a single point of failure in and of itself, as is the CPE...</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif">_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a>AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"">_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a>AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a>AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div><div dir="ltr">-- <br></div><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Regards,<br><br>Mark L. Tees<br></div>